TESTING & REGULATION
Why the sector needs self-regulation
A
t first, water quality regulation focused exclusively on monitoring water quality results to inform decision-making and enforce regulations. The water quality determinants and limits were based on scientific evidence available to the water fraternity, in particular the World Health Organization (WHO), which provides guideline limits for contaminants that may occur in water. Most countries use their own limits based on local conditions. In general, poor countries have lower limits, while developed countries will have stricter ones.
Paradigm shift
In May 2000, the water quality regulation space underwent a paradigm shift, when bacterial contamination of municipal water in Walkerton, Ontario, resulted in the worst public health disaster involving
The Collins Dictionary defines regulation as the controlling of an activity or process, usually by means of rules. All over the world, local and international regulations exist to govern the various aspects of water from protection to use, conservation and management. By Ayesha Laher* municipal water in Canadian history. At least seven people died and 2 300 became ill. A public inquiry examined the events and delineated the causes of the outbreak, which included the contamination of groundwater from upstream sources, improper practices and systemic fraudulence by the public utility operators, the recent privatisation of municipal water testing, the absence of criteria governing the quality of testing, and the lack of provisions made for the notification of results to multiple authorities. For the first time, external factors that were seemingly unrelated to water quality were implicated as reasons for the ultimate water quality failures. This led to the foundation of the water safety plan (WSP) concept, introduced by the WHO in 2004, which offers a more proactive and holistic approach to drinking water quality management
– from catchment to consumer – using the basic concepts of risk management: identify, assess, control and review risks in a continuous cycle. Instead of monitoring water quality parameters, the focus is on the identification, mitigation and monitoring of risks that may negatively impact water quality. Perhaps the greatest benefit of the WSP was a change in mindset from ‘monitoring to verify the safety of water’ to ‘monitoring to detect contaminants/risks, as potential for contamination is always present’. This places the responsibility of continuous monitoring and the management of risks on the water services institution, as there is always the potential for new emerging risks. The simplicity of the WSP concept has resulted in its adoption by more than 93 countries worldwide, and J A N /F E B 2021
45
